create-comment-thread

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the 50 quota unit cost, which is valuable operational context. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, potential side effects, or whether the operation is reversible.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the action ('Post a new top-level comment') and includes the quota cost with no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description should explain what the agent can expect in return and any preconditions. It reveals quota cost and top-level semantics but omits return value details, error conditions, and authorization prerequisites. For a simple creation tool, this is moderately complete but with clear gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters (text, videoId, channelId). The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema. It does not clarify that exactly one of videoId or channelId is required, though it says 'or'.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb+resource: 'Post a new top-level comment on a video or channel.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like reply-to-comment (which creates replies) and list-comment-threads (which lists threads).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'top-level comment' implies this tool starts a new thread, contrasting with reply-to-comment. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose a video vs. channel, nor explicitly mention alternatives for replies or listing.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.